The Bewilderness

House of Lords retains Life Sentence for now

In the annual Longford Lecture, civil rights lawyers intend to challenge any House of Lords reform that includes unelected elements. They view the issue of one man one vote as sacrosanct and intend to refer any reform to the European Court at Strasbourg on the grounds that the European Convention on Human Rights guarantees citizens a free vote on their legislature.

This has problems on many levels, but the first is that legislative reform should be decided by directly elected representatives, within a framework of law. The Convention is not the right channel for constitutional reform, since it bypasses and subverts the ballot box. Despite the moral cloak of democracy that Clive Stafford Smith expresses, he hopes to  impose his views by judgment, not through an election.

To make reform more palatable, Jack Straw is no longer insisting on compulsory dismissals from the remaining hereditary peers or life peers. This may swing the Tories onside since they had most to lose, if there had been expulsions. It is still unclear whether reforms will pass, but the short-term effect will be a larger Chamber as appointed and elected members  jostle together adding a complex dynamic to thsi fast-changing legislature.

'Special Relationship': The Doormat does not stir, yet

Kendall Myers, a State Department advisor, has argued that the 'special relationship' is a one-sided affair, since there is little or no profit for Great Britain in this relationship at a diplomatic level or during wartime. Apart from the stab at a weakened executive, following a mid-term election, is Kendall warning his own country that they have treated one of their closest client states with contempt or advising that the treatment of Great Britain should be normalised to the benefit of both countries.

There is a clear irony if the United States were to distance itself from Britain, satisfying the left-wing wet dream, while confirming their impotence. More important is the confirmation of Britain's influence: zero.

He asserted that the "special relationship", a term coined by Sir Winston Churchill in 1946, gave Britain little or nothing.

"It has been, from the very beginning, very one-sided. There never really has been a special relationship, or at least not one we've noticed."

The result of the Iraq war would be that any future British premier would be much less cosy with Washington than Mr Blair had been, and the Prime Minister's much vaunted view that Britain was "a transatlantic bridge" was now redundant.

Kendall identifies Rumsfeld's statement saying that the United States could act alone, and did not need any other ties, as a defining moment. It may be that this is long-term fallout from that radioactive master of the Pentagon: added to his damaging forays into diplomacy.

The Bush administration took little account of what Britain said, Mr Myers said. "We typically ignore them and take no notice. We say, 'There are the Brits coming to tell us how to run our empire. Let's park them'. It is a sad business and I don't think it does them justice."

David Cameron has already distanced himself from the 'special relationship' and any Labour leader would do well to follow. The extradition treaty and "Yo Blair" have proved excessive and unpopular, further damaging any continuation of this alliance. This may prove the high point of these ties as we shrink to an island, wracked by internal problems, and the United States turns to Asia.

Let us hope there comes a time when America regrets that they parked us. But we should turn away from them and develop our own ties with rising powers.

Evolution: Prosumers and 'Professional Amateurs'

Returning to the development of the "prosumer" market, this has now begun to acquire the target rich terra firma of the demographic. If one looks through articles in the trade papers, we can acknowledge that an ill-defined market of technophiles, enthusiasts and fanboys, has been redrawn in more precise terms, within electronics.

Here is Nokia on its plans for a mobile phone that will take advantage of comvergence:

Looking to the future, Nokia is predicting – perhaps unsurprisingly – major growth in the proportion of converged mobile devices sold. It also sees purchases being split between enterprises and ‘prosumers’ – highly knowledgeable individuals who are able to make very informed purchasing decisions.

“By 2009 we expect that companies will select and buy the devices used in 50% of all cases,” says Petts. [Senior Vice President for Nokia Enterprise Solutions]. “The rest will be prosumers selecting from an approved company list or buying freely. Today, the proportion that is the company itself choosing and buying the devices to deploy is much smaller.”

We can note the role of prosumers in complex purchases, and how they form the vanguard for individual purchases, a stepping stone between the corporate and the retail markets.

Brightcove, a company aiming to detach professionals and "professional amateurs" away from the equal opportunity platform of Youtube, has also defined this niche:

Unlike YouTube, Brightcove focuses on professional video producers and near-professional-level amateurs, or “prosumers” as they are called in consumer electronics parlance.

“The Brightcove network is open, but the Internet TV tools are built for professionals, so for a ‘prosumer,’ Brightcove can be an exciting way for them to bring their content to market,” said Mr. Berrey.

There is now a clear indication that individuals who have attained a level of technical knowledge in particular consumer electronics niches are targeted as buyers of products and as producers of professional material. We can see both facets of information: greater power on the part of the purchaser and a wider network in which he can disseminate his wares, possibly for peer approval and profit. The network effect of the internet has given these niches critical mass and power in the marketplace.

As the word prosumer is now acquiring a certain cachet and is flexibly applied across diverse marketplaces, we begin to see the term 'professional amateur' for those who both buy and contribute to a wider media, such as video, Photoshop art or other creative endeavours.

One Operator, Many UAVs

Qinetiq has demonstrated a system that allows one jet to co-ordinate a number of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), instead of using one operator per vehicle. This allows the reduction of the number of personnel teleoperating UAVs since they are complemented by a self-organising computer:

QinetiQ has successfully completed the world's first flight demonstration of a system capable of controlling and autonomously organising multiple unmanned aircraft. The successful flight trial was conducted to support the concept of using a package of self-organising unmanned air vehicles (UAVs) under the control of an operator flying in a fast jet.

An autonomy computer using agent-based reasoning software in the surrogate UAV was responsible for the self-organising of the UAV package at a tactical level and the operation of communication systems, sensors and weapons. The trial is a world first in demonstrating such a complex system in flight which greatly reduces the workload of the human operator.

During the flight trial the BAC1-11 flew and operated as if it was unmanned, being directed from a command station designed for use in a fast jet. Throughout the demonstration, flown from Boscombe Down airfield in Wiltshire at the end of October, a flight crew was retained for safety monitoring and control during takeoff and landing. This enabled the flight to take place largely in uncontrolled airspace over South West England without requiring special clearance.

Labour: In Hock to the Unions

The Electoral Commission has published new details from the loans that all political parties have arranged in the drought of funds from their dwindling individual members. Most of these loans are unsecured, with interest rates below the commercial rate provided by a bank. The Labour party faces the greatest problem as they have to repay 5.5m pounds by the end of the year.

Tony Blair, who swept into power in 1997 determined to break the influence of the trade union movement, will now have to appeal to the brotherhood to rescue the party which has £23 million in outstanding loans. Any increase in funding from the unions would come with strings attached over policy which would not be welcomed by Mr Blair or Gordon Brown, his likely successor...

The yawning gap in the party's finances will give new urgency to plans by the Government to push through caps on the amount the parties can spend on local and national election campaigns as the Tories are poised to outspend the Labour Party heavily in marginal seats.

The Labour Party is in desperate straits: funds need to be secured fast and the advantages of Tory cash require nullification. As the Telegraph has noted, this will provide the source of fresh funds, the trade unions, dominant influence over policy and presages a potential left-wing turn. The alternative is a partisan model of political funding from the state, biased towards Labour, and destructive of relationships with the Loyal Opposition. If Labour gerrymanders, gloves may be taken off. And that is without the current police inquiry....

Comment is free but Commonsense costs

Monbiot secures more lunacy with his curious notion that we should slash the defence budget by 80 to 90 percent and reallocate the resources as tax cuts and militia funding. Actually he didn't say that! He wants to cut the defence budget by this much, since he considers the wars are aligned with the military-industrial complex, that Eisenhower beast which slouched through the undergrowth for fifty years, yet has never been caught sight of as an evident conspiracy. Pacifists from before the First World War would recognise this incarnation of the merchants of death.

Monbiot does not believe that we have any external enemies. He sleeps safely at night, sure of a future where we will not face aggression, gangsters or rogue states. In defence policy,, he would go 'bare', to use insurance parlance. I am not so sure.

If his article concerned the mistaken orientation of our defence and foreign policy, with the legacy of inappropriate military programmes such as the Typhoon, sign me up. Alas, that merely formed a step towards his ultimate objective:

Military spending enhances all these threats. The jets and ships and tanks it buys make a large (though so far unquantified) contribution to climate change and the competition for resources. It diverts money from helping the poor; it generates a self-justifying momentum which stimulates conflict. The budget would contribute far more to our security, the report says, if it were spent on energy efficiency, foreign aid and arms control.

So what role remains for our armed forces? A small one. A shrunken army should concentrate on helping the civil authorities to catch terrorists and deal with epidemics, floods and power cuts; the navy should be deployed to protect fisheries and catch drugs smugglers; the airforce is largely redundant. Now that foreign adventures are no longer an option, it is time we turned our war spending into what it claims to be: a budget for our defence.

Some of this is agreeable to a libertarian. Junk the state commitments to climate change, poverty relief and international aid. These are charters for corruption. Enshrine a right to bear arms! And keep the nukes and an air force as an insurance policy. Still, you can pick sound elements from most schemes, just so long as the greenwash is junked.

Libertarian Alliance Blog

An early heads up for the Libertarian Alliance blog, which appears to still be under heavy construction. I was surprised that they linked to my old blog, Airstrip One, now wallowing under after a few years.

Der Spiegel: Rooting for Eurussia

Spiegel has a well-crafted interview with the Russian Defence Minister, Ivanov, where he uses our language, with some realism, to state that the West's mission in Afghanistan is a failure, that Russia is merely working for its own security and that they are reacting to Western expansion. Spiegel acts as a vehicle for Russian apologetics.

Russia does have peculiar problems with security due to its vast space. Yet, the shrill and thin skin of prestige motivates much of their statements and actions, despite Ivanov's mollifying tone. Note how he reacts over Georgia:

SPIEGEL: You have cancelled all air traffic to (the Georgian capital) Tiflis.

Ivanov: These are not sanctions. We no longer operate direct flights to Tiflis because Georgian airlines owe us money. You were the ones who introduced us to the market economy in the 1990s. Now we are sticking to it and you come to us with accusations. We cannot accept the fact that Georgia continues to insult us. It is clear to us that the Georgian leadership is dragging NATO and the EU into its efforts to solve its internal problems.

It tells us more that Ivanov uses a German platform to portray Russia sympathetically.

Brown Champions the poor (by creating more of them)

Reform have published an update on the welfare state by Nicholas Boys Smith, a former Conservative Party parliamentary candidate. Welfare expenditure is now more than the money spent on education, twice as much as law and order, whilst rivalling the National Health Service. Boys Smith concluded that the weaknesses of tradtional welfare: expansion, means-testing and the poverty trap had been built up and exacerbated by Brown's complex changes. It would be impolite to dignify these changes with the word reform.

Instead, Britain now has the deepest poverty trap in the Western world, with thousands of people stuck in low-paid and part-time work because any extra money that they earn by finding a better job or working longer hours would have to be handed over to the Treasury.

Just under 800,000 working parents lose more than 70p in every extra pound they earn, and nearly 400,000 lose more than 90p in the pound. About 34,000 people lose more than £1 for every £1 they earn.

We should welcome any report that brings public attention to the utter failures of the welfare state we're in. Yet, government's failure and the unfitness of Brown to continue in political office, only arises when we see Treasury's response:

A Treasury spokesman said: “Since 1997 the Government has lifted 700,000 children out of poverty, and employment is at record levels. Reforms of the tax and benefits system mean that families with children are on average £1,500 per year better off in real terms since 1997, and those in the poorest fifth are £3,400 per year better off.”

Their response is based on the premise that if you say something long enough, people will believe, even if it is not true. This may have acquired credibility in the early years of the administration but the drift between utterance and reality can only lead to cynicism and contempt if these problems are not grappled with.

Welfare reform will have to wait until Brown's personal and political failings lead to his fall. He is a divisive figure, unable to work in Cabinet, contemptuous of politician and people. The electorate is more intelligent than he thinks; Brown is more flawed than Labour anticipates.

The Last LA Conference that is not on the internet

I spent the weekend at the Libertarian Alliance conference in the National Liberal Club. You can already see some of the results with the renewed interest in space entrepreneurship, and also in future posts on other subjects.

Brian Micklethwait has interviewed Tim Evans for a podcast. The organisation remains both despotic and co-operative. Leaders will lead, but they cannot afford to annoy anyone else who contributes, because they do contribute.

I say and said that they [Gold Subscribers] are happening because Tim likes and is very good at fund raising, and likes organising and attending dinner parties

There is also the argument that you start out with what you are good at and go from there. What new ideas will Tim wish to start, once he has sufficient Gold Subscribers and affiliated speakers.

But Brian, as always, describes the LA, with elegant clarity:

And how it works is that it is owned by a despot, now a joint despot consisting of Sean and Tim.  But – and we talked about this – that doesn’t actually make for a regular despotism, because Sean and Tim don’t want to piss off anyone who is making any sort of useful contribution. 

The Conference had more sessions on new developments such as Dale Amon's "Entrepreneurship in Space" and Jackie Danicki's 'new media' talk. Whilst this was important for many attendees who had never followed these before, it proved less attractive if you followed the content more closely. This does not detract from the quality of both presentations.

I wonder if this was a missed opportunity to engage head on with authoritarianism, given the current attacks on civil liberties.

Moreover, there are no other links on Technorati to the event. Given Jackie Danicki's talk, Tim Evans and Sean Gabb need to facilitate new media access next year, and perhaps interview some of the talkers for podcasts, turning the whole conference into an internet event. And Jackie Danicki has set out the reform programme better than I ever could.